1.  The applicant requests that his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.  He also requests that his DD Form 214 be corrected to reflect his military occupational specialty (MOS) as 45J and not 68M.  He states, in effect, that he had leave orders after serving his tour in Vietnam.  A personnel officer at Fort Lewis, WA told him to go home and he, the personnel officer, would send his assignment orders to him.  When the orders did not arrive, he reported to Herlong, NV where he received pay and turned in his leave orders.  They took everything and he never heard another thing for 12 years.  His father, who worked for the Federal government in Nevada, would periodically ask his Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)           co-workers to check if the Army had his son listed as absent without leave (AWOL).  He always received a negative answer.  His wife would periodically check with the Reno, NV police department with the same question.  She would get the same negative answer.  Even when he was treated by the VA for Agent Orange and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) symptoms, no report listed him as AWOL.  Only after contacting his Senators did the Army go to his house and arrested and handcuffed him in front of his children.  Army-appointed legal counsel pressured him into signing a paper admitting to AWOL and then he was discharged.

2.  The applicant’s military records show he was born on 11 July 1951.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 6 December 1968 for 3 years.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded MOS 45J (Aircraft Weapon Systems Repairer).  He was assigned to Vietnam in September 1969.  He was promoted to Specialist Four E-4 on 9 March 1970.  He departed Vietnam on 28 June 1970 on special leave.  He had served there for  18 months and had been awarded the Vietnam Service Medal and the Vietnam Campaign Medal.  The applicant has no record of any type of disciplinary actions ever being taken against him.

3.  The applicant’s special leave was due to expire on or about 1 August 1970.  There is no evidence in the records to show that the applicant contacted, either telephonically, in writing or personally, the personnel officer or anyone from the Fort Lewis, WA personnel office to query his status.  His supporting documentation shows only that he went several times to Herlong, NV (apparently an Air Force installation) to check on his orders.

4.  On 11 September 1981, the applicant agreed to report to Fort Ord, CA on or before 26 October 1981 and place himself under military control at that time.

5.  On 26 October 1981, the applicant was placed on excess leave pending his discharge.
6.  The Chapter 14 discharge packet is not available.

7.  On 18 December 1981, the applicant was discharged, with a UOTHC discharge, in pay grade E-1 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14 for misconduct - AWOL.  He had completed 1 year, 10 months and 24 days of creditable active service.  His DD Form 214 shows his time lost was from 2 September 1970 - 29 October 1981.

8.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.

CONCLUSIONS

1.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows his correct MOS.  On 1 January 1970, the applicant was awarded MOS 45M.  At some point after this date, MOS 45M was converted to MOS 68M.  At the time of the applicant’s discharge 68M was the correct code for his specialty.

2.  There is some injustice in the applicant receiving a UOTHC discharge.  He did serve honorably in Vietnam for 18 months.  He did report to a military installation prior to the end of his leave to check on his assignment orders.  The Army was negligent in apparently not entering his deserter status into the U.S. Army Deserter Information Point data base so law enforcement officials could discover his status.  

3.  The applicant also was negligent in not reporting to or at least contacting an Army installation, preferably Fort Lewis, WA where his problems originated, to query his duty status.  As a junior non-commissioned officer, he had responsibility for his own career and should have taken the initiative to contact Fort Lewis.  His failure to do so gives him an equal share in the blame for his AWOL problem.

4.  In view of the foregoing, it would be just to correct the applicant’s records as recommended below.



RECOMMENDATION:  

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing:

    a.   that the individual concerned was given a general discharge from the Army on 18 December 1981, under the provisions of Chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200, for misconduct - AWOL;

     b.  that the individual concerned be issued a General Discharge Certificate from the Army of the United States, dated 18 December 1981, denoting a general discharge in lieu of the UOTHC discharge now held by him;

     c.  that item 29 of the applicant’s DD Form 214 be corrected to show his period of time lost from 700902 - 811025; and

      d.  that the individual concerned be issued a new DD Form 214 reflecting the aforementioned corrections.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:

                       GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION 

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION




				                                                                         		
						CHAIRPERSON